That's Kevin Drum in Mother Jones on January 22, providing an egregious example of the left using violent gun imagery to make a political point, even after the Tucson massacre and all those calls for new civility. I found that via Matt Yglesias, who quotes Drum and even puts the gun-to-the-head business in boldface but takes absolutely zero note of the extremely violent rhetoric.

28 comments:

Anyone who would use that imagery has absolutely no idea how to handle a weapon or it's proper use.

On the other hand, if he knows precisely what he/she is saying they are as psychotic and sociopathic as Loughner and the other lone wolf assassins who occasionally perpetrate murder and mayhem on innocents.

People who talk like this need psychiatric help and distanced from society.

All the media focus after the 2010 midterms was and is on the Tea Party movement and how it will "split" the Republican Party. The under-covered story was the losses to the Blue Dogs. Democrats in Congress as a whole are now more liberal/progressive than their predecessors. There's no reason or incentive for those on the left or the right to be more "civil". "Civility" doesn't generate grassroots excitement; doesn't generate media coverage; and certainly doesn't generate donations.

This opinion piece is just another example of a now more left wing Democratic Party. And nothing get the left wing more energized than class warfare and "protest politics"

Social control by violence does not need to be continuous. All it requires is an annual or so violent attack that is said to be justified as caused by the victim and never redressed...but thereafter is alluded to for subtle control. A violent attack on totally innocent people has the greatest impact.

The under-covered story was the losses to the Blue Dogs. Democrats in Congress as a whole are now more liberal/progressive than their predecessors. There's no reason or incentive for those on the left or the right to be more "civil". "Civility" doesn't generate grassroots excitement; doesn't generate media coverage; and certainly doesn't generate donations.

Interesting comment that got me thinking.

What is forgotten here by many is that the Democrats regained Congress, both House and Senate, by intentionally running a bunch of apparent moderate blue dogs in swing seats. And, they were then sent packing when they gave in to Pelosi's pressure to vote for the left's agenda, such as ObamaCare, the "stimulus" bill, and financial "reform" by the two guys who caused the problem in the first place.

The Blue Dogs were fired because they went along with Pelosi, for the most part. It was just amazing that it was any sort of surprise. Their districts were center to center-right, and their voters were never behind that sort of legislation.

Er, "put a gun to [the] head" is a well-worn expression about forcing an honest choice. Are you really suggesting it is equivalent to, say, Michelle Bachmann suggesting her supporters should be "armed and dangerous" over energy policy?